Are Modern Day Prophets Redundant?

[mormonnewb]

I've always wondered why we saints place so much importance in modern day prophets because I can't seem to find any place in scripture where Christ tells us to await their appearance and heed their counsel. He seems to assign that role to the Holy Spirit.

"These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." John 14:25-26

"Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.... I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come." John 16:7, 12-13

So if we have the Holy Spirit to "teach us all things" and to "guide us into all truth," why are we so eager to hear from MEN? Or am I missing something here? Did Christ say elsewhere in the NT or BoM that He would also send us living prophets? I know that the D&C and conference talks has TONS on the role of modern day prophets but I'm looking for third-party verification.

And note: This isn't a question about sustaining the Brethren as prophets as it relates to the affairs of the Church, but rather as to whether we've assigned them an expanded role as prophets of our souls, which seems to be the role of the Holy Spirit.

[strappinglad]

Well, there is always the missionary scripture of Amos 3:7 . The OT is big on prophets and their value to Israel. They regularly spoke of a Redeemer and the people sought counsel from them. I'm not sure where you get the idea that they are " prophets of our souls" . They are prophets of Christ.

[Rivers]

The Holy Spirt provides personal revelation to our souls.  The prophets and apostles guide the church as whole body.  They also testify of Christ and invite us to receive that personal revelation from the spirit.

[mormonnewb]

The Holy Spirt provides personal revelation to our souls.  The prophets and apostles guide the church as whole body.  They also testify of Christ and invite us to receive that personal revelation from the spirit.

They also give us revelation of commandments for PERSONAL salvation -- the WoW, garments, etc. I agree that we are invited to pray for personal revelation as to these things, but in the absence of such, I think we're supposed to comply anyway, right?

[ksfisher]

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2010/10/two-lines-of-communication?lang=eng

Elder Oaks explains the need for both personal and priesthood revelation.

[mormonnewb]

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2010/10/two-lines-of-communication?lang=eng

Elder Oaks explains the need for both personal and priesthood revelation.

In this talk, Elder Oaks explains:

"The priesthood line is the channel by which God has spoken to His children through the scriptures in times past. And it is this line through which He currently speaks through the teachings and counsel of living prophets and apostles and other inspired leaders."

I'm missing something because this doesn't seem to square with what Jesus told His disciples in John. Prior to His death, they were basically asking, "What are we going to do when you're gone?"

According to our teachings, He would have said, "I leave behind a priesthood line, at whose head shall be [Peter] and it is through this line, living prophets will give teachings and instructions." However, in actuality, He said NOTHING about living prophets.

Now, perhaps it is the case that Christ went on to talk about living prophets but it's not reflected in the scriptures. Or perhaps, it's covered in one of the Synoptic Gospels or in Acts.

However, without some scriptural reference, it seems that we have made a HUGE leap. Christ is specifically asked how His followers are to receive knowledge of His commandments and Christ answers that He will send the Holy Spirit to do so. Yet, in our Church, it is the Prophet who tells us what Christ commands and if it conflicts with what we get from the Holy Spirit, we are to defer to the Prophet.

Now, after almost two centuries, I know that I'm not the first person to ask this question and that there is a simple answer that will make me put down this tin of Folgers that I'm currently holding

[Tacenda]

In this talk, Elder Oaks explains:

"The priesthood line is the channel by which God has spoken to His children through the scriptures in times past. And it is this line through which He currently speaks through the teachings and counsel of living prophets and apostles and other inspired leaders."

I'm missing something because this doesn't seem to square with what Jesus told His disciples in John. Prior to His death, they were basically asking, "What are we going to do when you're gone?"

According to our teachings, He would have said, "I leave behind a priesthood line, at whose head shall be [Peter] and it is through this line, living prophets will give teachings and instructions." However, in actuality, He said NOTHING about living prophets.

Now, perhaps it is the case that Christ went on to talk about living prophets but it's not reflected in the scriptures. Or perhaps, it's covered in one of the Synoptic Gospels or in Acts.

However, without some scriptural reference, it seems that we have made a HUGE leap. Christ is specifically asked how His followers are to receive knowledge of His commandments and Christ answers that He will send the Holy Spirit to do so. Yet, in our Church, it is the Prophet who tells us what Christ commands and if it conflicts with what we get from the Holy Spirit, we are to defer to the Prophet.

Now, after almost two centuries, I know that I'm not the first person to ask this question and that there is a simple answer that will make me put down this tin of Folgers that I'm currently holding

Spot on. In Primary today, they focused on following the prophet as the only way, nothing about a personal relationship, or nothing about the Holy Spirit.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I've always wondered why we saints place so much importance in modern day prophets because I can't seem to find any place in scripture where Christ tells us to await their appearance and heed their counsel. He seems to assign that role to the Holy Spirit.

"These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." John 14:25-26

"Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.... I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come." John 16:7, 12-13

So if we have the Holy Spirit to "teach us all things" and to "guide us into all truth," why are we so eager to hear from MEN? Or am I missing something here? Did Christ say elsewhere in the NT or BoM that He would also send us living prophets? I know that the D&C and conference talks has TONS on the role of modern day prophets but I'm looking for third-party verification.

And note: This isn't a question about sustaining the Brethren as prophets as it relates to the affairs of the Church, but rather as to whether we've assigned them an expanded role as prophets of our souls, which seems to be the role of the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit does bring to mind whatsoever Christ hath said or will to the individual man or woman, but the Bible goes on to assign to the Apostles who lived with Christ and those called after him. In Peter was given to speak for and to bind things in heaven or on earth...we already see when there is no central ruling Authority, the 1000's of other faiths, denominations and beliefs that have few common beliefs.

[mormonnewb]

The Holy Spirit does bring to mind whatsoever Christ hath said or will to the individual man or woman, but the Bible goes on to assign to the Apostles who lived with Christ and those called after him. In Peter was given to speak for and to bind things in heaven or on earth...we already see when there is no central ruling Authority, the 1000's of other faiths, denominations and beliefs that have few common beliefs.

Thanks! That's what I'm looking for! What verse was Peter given this authority?

[Glenn101]

@mormonweb,

   You have noted correctly that God does reveal the truth to us via the Holy Ghost. But who was Jesus talking to when He said "These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." John 14:25-26 ???

 

But in this, as in all things, we need to remember that "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." (Matthew 4:4)

 

I can also point you to a couple of other scriptures that point out that the God himself appointed apostles and prophets (among other callings) in the church (Corinthians 12:28)  and is built upon a foundation of apostles and prophets, with Jesus Christ being the chief cornerstone. (Ephesians 2:20).

 

I, myself, would not characterize prophets as being redundant, seeing as how it was Jesus Christ himself that chose the twelve to lead His Church after His ascension. It would obviate the need for a restoration also, and unless Joseph Smith was lying, and unless the Holy Ghost has been lying to millions of people since, there was a restoration.

 

I know that this may seem really far fetched, but if a person feels they have received a personal revelation that conflicts with revelation that comes via a prophet called of God, may the individual needs to check the source of their revelation.

 

Glenn

[strappinglad]

I wonder what it is about little children that Christ in Mat 19:14 said "such are the kingdom.." Who was Christ speaking to when He said He would send the Holy Spirit? Could it be that adults require a heaping helping of the Spirit in order to put them at the same level spiritually as the little children?

As a side note, just what do you think the Spirit would tell you about the commandments that the Prophet would not? How about that a glass of Jack once a week is OK , that it's acceptable to gossip if it's the truth , that one can cheat on one's spouse as long as one is over 50 miles from home? Believe me when I say that I have actually heard these types of rationalizations. Or should I call them revelations.

[Coreyb]

Thanks! That's what I'm looking for! What verse was Peter given this authority?

Matthew 16:17-19

[jchristopher]

"This may seem really far fetched"

Why do you think it would seem far fetched? God doesn't give conflicting revelations. Unless you've never received a testimony of the divinely appointed mission of the Prophet Joseph Smith Jr. or the revelations about the the continuation of the restoration through an unbroken line of prophets until the second coming of The Lord, then that testimony should be enough. A "revelation" that indicates otherwise most certainly comes from a less than exalted source

Glenn

[ksfisher]

In this talk, Elder Oaks explains:

"The priesthood line is the channel by which God has spoken to His children through the scriptures in times past. And it is this line through which He currently speaks through the teachings and counsel of living prophets and apostles and other inspired leaders."

I'm missing something because this doesn't seem to square with what Jesus told His disciples in John. Prior to His death, they were basically asking, "What are we going to do when you're gone?"

According to our teachings, He would have said, "I leave behind a priesthood line, at whose head shall be [Peter] and it is through this line, living prophets will give teachings and instructions." However, in actuality, He said NOTHING about living prophets.

Now, perhaps it is the case that Christ went on to talk about living prophets but it's not reflected in the scriptures. Or perhaps, it's covered in one of the Synoptic Gospels or in Acts.

However, without some scriptural reference, it seems that we have made a HUGE leap. Christ is specifically asked how His followers are to receive knowledge of His commandments and Christ answers that He will send the Holy Spirit to do so. Yet, in our Church, it is the Prophet who tells us what Christ commands and if it conflicts with what we get from the Holy Spirit, we are to defer to the Prophet.

Now, after almost two centuries, I know that I'm not the first person to ask this question and that there is a simple answer that will make me put down this tin of Folgers that I'm currently holding

11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

(Ephesians 4:11-13)

[halconero]

Do you want Jesus sayings, or post-Resurrection verses that point to an organized, apostolic, prophetic organization and ministry?

[Hamba Tuhan]

"These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." John 14:25-26

"Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.... I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come." John 16:7, 12-13

 

 

I'm missing something because this doesn't seem to square with what Jesus told His disciples in John. Prior to His death, they were basically asking, "What are we going to do when you're gone?"

 

The promises you have quoted above from John 14 and 16 were indeed made to men who were worrying about how they would be able to function after the Saviour was gone. In what context? At the Last Supper. And who was present with Jesus at the Last Supper, and to whom therefore were these promises made? To the Twelve Apostles (ἀπόστολος) the men who, as the Lord's chosen 'messengers or envoys' would bear the responsibility of leading, guiding, and preserving the Church and its doctrine in the absence of its Head.

 

The text makes it clear that Jesus was addressing specifically those who had 'been with [Him] from the beginning' and who would therefore be required to add their witnesses to the witness of the Holy Spirit (John 15:27): Judas Iscariot (13:2 ), Simon Peter (13:6, 24, 36-37), John the Beloved (13:23), Thomas (14:5), Philip (14:8-9), Judas not Iscariot (14:22).

 

The task he laid upon them during this meeting was clear: 'Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you' (John 15:16). It was in this specific context that the Lord assured them of future revelation: 'I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come' (16:13).

 

It appears further that it was the other Judas's understanding that he and the other apostles had been given privileged promises: 'Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?' (John 14:22). Yet even if one insists on reading the 'us' in this question as meaning more than the apostles present at this meeting, I would suggest it is clear from these chapters that the Lord indeed left ordained, authorised prophets in His stead, men to whom He had given specific promises of continuing revelation, with Peter at minimum having received from Jesus 'the keys of the kingdom of heaven', whose decisions and actions (binding and loosing) would be honoured and recognised in heaven (Matthew 16:19).

Edited May 19, 2014 by Hamba Tuhan

[Calm]

Good to see you, Hamba. Been too long.

[mormonnewb]

Do you want Jesus sayings, or post-Resurrection verses that point to an organized, apostolic, prophetic organization and ministry?

I'm not being clear (as usual). It seems pretty clear that Jesus set up an apostolic structure. I have no question that SOMEONE must lead the church (any church). Someone must have the keys (authority) to set the policies and directions of the church. So I have no question that Brethren are authorized to receive revelation with regards to temples, ordinances, and anything else dealing with the Church.

However, the Brethren's authority seems to extend far beyond Church matters, and to matters of personal revelation, which I thought was supposed to have been delegated to the Holy Spirit. Sure, the Brethren should determine the location of temple, the minimum age for baptism, the rules for serving a mission, etc. But should they also determine which form of caffeine is accepted to HF (the cold kind), what kinds of movies I should watch, what activities are proper for my family on Sunday, whether I should get a tattoo, how many earrings I can wear in each ear, etc.?

To some extent, all churches attempt to have this type of influence over their members. However, most Protestant churches do not lay claim to having living prophets, so their influence is limited to what they can cite from scripture. A Baptist preacher can't say, "God has revealed to me that none of you should ever have coffee ever again. Thus, sayeth my Jolt Cola distribution contract." In the face of such a "revelation," a Protestant would ask, "Who made you God? Unless you can point to scripture prohibiting coffee, I'm having Starbucks on the way home."

As Mormons, we see things much differently in that regard. The Prophet is allowed to receive revelation for members' personal lives that is independent of scripture and trumps their own revelation about such matters (e.g., whether to support civil marriage for same-sex couples). Given the importance that prophets would play in our lives after the resurrection, it would seem that Christ would have told us explicitly to heed their counsel upon His death, and to not depend so much on the Holy Spirit. After all, the Protestants missed the entire concept. What are they missing?

[Hamba Tuhan]

Good to see you, Hamba. Been too long.

 

Thanks. I was just about to write something about how rubbish moderation can sometimes drive posters away for long periods of time, but I'd hate to be banned again, so I changed my mind.

[mormonnewb]

The promises you have quoted above from John 14 and 16 were indeed made to men who were worrying about how they would be able to function after the Saviour was gone. In what context? At the Last Supper. And who was present with Jesus at the Last Supper, and to whom therefore were these promises made? To the Twelve Apostles (ἀπόστολος) the men who, as the Lord's chosen 'messengers or envoys' would bear the responsibility of leading, guiding, and preserving the Church and its doctrine in the absence of its Head.

 

The text makes it clear that Jesus was addressing specifically those who had 'been with [Him] from the beginning' and who would therefore be required to add their witnesses to the witness of the Holy Spirit (John 15:27): Judas Iscariot (13:2 ), Simon Peter (13:6, 24, 36-37), John the Beloved (13:23), Thomas (14:5), Philip (14:8-9), Judas not Iscariot (14:22).

 

The task he laid upon them during this meeting was clear: 'Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you' (John 15:16). In was in this specific context that the Lord assured them of future revelation: 'I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come' (16:13).

 

It appears further that it was the other Judas's understanding that he and the other apostles had been given privileged promises: 'Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?' (John 14:22). Yet even if one insists on reading the 'us' in this question as meaning more than the apostles present at this meeting, I would suggest it is clear from these chapters that the Lord indeed left ordained, authorised prophets in His stead, men to whom He had given specific promises of continuing revelation, with Peter at minimum having received from Jesus 'the keys of the kingdom of heaven', whose decisions and actions (binding and loosing) would be honoured and recognised in heaven (Matthew 16:19).

I can see your point that Christ was going to send the Holy Spirit to the apostles, except that the Spirit fell upon ALL those assembled at Pentecost. Did he leave a second set of instructions as to how the Holy Spirit would interact with the rest of us?

[Hamba Tuhan]

A Protestant would ask, "Who made you God? Unless you can point to scripture prohibiting coffee, I'm having Starbucks on the way home."

 

Isn't this just a more circular way of pointing out Protestants believe in being subject to the words of prophets; they just don't accept extra-Biblical prophets?

 

After all, the Protestants missed the entire concept. What are they missing?

 

It's not so much that they missed this concept; instead, they openly rebelled against it. In fact, this concept is what Luther and others openly protested.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Hamba Tuhan

[Hamba Tuhan]

I can see your point that Christ was going to send the Holy Spirit to the apostles, except that the Spirit fell upon ALL those assembled at Pentecost. Did he leave a second set of instructions as to how the Holy Spirit would interact with the rest of us?

 

Based on personal experience, I don't think the Spirit interacts one way with prophets and apostles and another way with me. That doesn't make me a prophet, though, nor does it alter the fact that prophets are under obligation to teach the truth that the Spirit guides them into.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Hamba Tuhan

[mormonnewb]

Matthew 16:17-19

Thanks, Brother!

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Matthew 16:18-19

This seems to confirm Peter's role as head apostle and confer upon him the keys of his authority. As for "binding on earth," I read this to apply to the sealing power. I'm just not sure that Jesus was granting Peter the power of PERSONAL revelation for the entire earth. For example, when Peter received the revelation that he no longer had to be kosher, he explained to Cornelius, "God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean" (Acts 10:28, KJV). However, he didn't make this a commandment for all of the other saints to follow. A great many Christians would continue calling food "unclean" until they received their own revelation (or had a BLT).

Or am I missing it? Did Peter elsewhere receive a personal revelation not otherwise supported by scripture that he issued as a commandment to the saints?

[Duncan]

Thanks, Brother!

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Matthew 16:18-19

This seems to confirm Peter's role as head apostle and confer upon him the keys of his authority. As for "binding on earth," I read this to apply to the sealing power. I'm just not sure that Jesus was granting Peter the power of PERSONAL revelation for the entire earth. For example, when Peter received the revelation that he no longer had to be kosher, he explained to Cornelius, "God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean" (Acts 10:28, KJV). However, he didn't make this a commandment for all of the other saints to follow. A great many Christians would continue calling food "unclean" until they received their own revelation (or had a BLT).

Or am I missing it? Did Peter elsewhere receive a personal revelation not otherwise supported by scripture that he issued as a commandment to the saints?

 

Prophets aren't supposed to get personal revelation to each and every individual member, that is up to us, Prophets and others teach us how to receive personal revelation

Edited May 19, 2014 by Duncan

[teddyaware]

Thanks, Brother!

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Matthew 16:18-19

This seems to confirm Peter's role as head apostle and confer upon him the keys of his authority. As for "binding on earth," I read this to apply to the sealing power. I'm just not sure that Jesus was granting Peter the power of PERSONAL revelation for the entire earth. For example, when Peter received the revelation that he no longer had to be kosher, he explained to Cornelius, "God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean" (Acts 10:28, KJV). However, he didn't make this a commandment for all of the other saints to follow. A great many Christians would continue calling food "unclean" until they received their own revelation (or had a BLT).

Or am I missing it? Did Peter elsewhere receive a personal revelation not otherwise supported by scripture that he issued as a commandment to the saints?

If you will simply read Peter's first and second General Epistles (the chief Apostle's commandments given to the Church after he first received revelation and instruction for the Church at large by the Holy Ghost), you will see Peter acting as the chief Prophet, Seer and Revelator to the entire New Testament era Church of Christ. These two epistles are the exact equivalent of the General Conference addresses of President Monson as published in the Ensign.

1 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:

2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:

 

To avoid confusion, it's critically important to interpret isolated scriptural passages in light of other clarifying passages found elsewhere in the scriptures. When one factors in the entire New Testament, when reading the passages you refer to in John, it becomes clear the Saviour is teaching His Apostles how to receive revelation from heaven, by the Holy Ghost, in order to fulfill their ordained assignments as the lead Prophets, Seers and Revelators to the New Testament Church. Of course, these instructions of the Lord also apply to each and every member of the Church as well, as they function and serve -- hopefully by revelation -- in whatever callings and stewardships they might have within the body of Christ. Nevertheless, the Apostles are first and foremost in presiding revelatory authority, having stewardship as General Authorities over the entire Church...

27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues. (1 Cor 12)

Edited May 19, 2014 by teddyaware